Missing out on coaches?

[txjazzfan]

There seem to be some pretty good up and coming assistant coaches out there interviewing for head coaching jobs. Since Sloan is staying another year, are we missing out on guys like Tom Thibodeau of Boston, Monty Williams of Portland, and even our own Ty Corbin? Any thoughts? Comments?

 

[calijazz]

What do you suppose the Jazz do? Fire Sloan so they can hire his assistant? Ludicrous. If you have a proven coach, just stick with him (which we clearly do). You have a whole lot more to lose than to gain.

 

[txjazzfan]

What do you suppose the Jazz do? Fire Sloan so they can hire his assistant? Ludicrous. If you have a proven coach, just stick with him (which we clearly do). You have a whole lot more to lose than to gain.

Ok ... well ... I guess you missed my point. Didn't say get rid of or fire Sloan. Just was wanting to see what people thought. Sloan is always up in the air about whether he is gonna return.

 

[calijazz]

Ok ... well ... I guess you missed my point. Didn't say get rid of or fire Sloan. Just was wanting to see what people thought. Sloan is always up in the air about whether he is gonna return.

There will always be other candidates when the time comes...I don't think we need to worry about missing out on this group.

But anyways, welcome to the board.

 

[InGameStrategy]

What do you suppose the Jazz do? Fire Sloan so they can hire his assistant? Ludicrous. If you have a proven coach, just stick with him (which we clearly do). You have a whole lot more to lose than to gain.

Um, no, you don't fire Sloan to hire Ty Corbin; you don't renew his contract so that you can hire a coach who actually enforces his own philosophy and develops players.

Sloan does neither. He has allowed Boozer and Okur to play poor defense for years (NOT saying that they should be DNP'd; they should be sat down for a possession or two until they get the message), he doesn't play players who have actually produced, he overplays some players, and he has a long string of poor relationships with especially "foreign" players not named Okur (Kirilenkogate (although it's been patched up now, it deteriorated far too far before), Giricek (was no reason to bury him like Sloan did), Arroyo (no need to escalate the way it did), and Amaechi (rumors of not just poor use of him but of outright discrimination)).

Thibodeau is a missed opportunity. He came from a relatively small-market NBA town. He worked under a head coach who was both a disciplinarian and a player's coach who was especially good with foreigners). The Jazz would've been a more attractive destination than the Hornets. All Miller had to do was not renew Sloan. The Jazz don't owe Sloan any job security whatsoever, and unless Sloan changes the way he handles players and in-game situations (which is unlikely beyond what he has already changed), I don't see Utah being able to get above the ceiling that they have been vacillating at for decades on end.

You have a lot more to gain. Such as a championship from a coach who can lead teams better. Being a hard-nosed tough guy only accomplishes part of that role.

 

[BENTLEY]

Nice post InGame.

 

[honz]

There are always up and coming assistants and not many of them last as head coaches.

 

[Revolution 9]

How dare you question Sloan! His system is championship proven.
Obviously we'll wilt away, and die whenever Sloan leaves.
He is holding this thing together.

 

[InGameStrategy]

There are always up and coming assistants and not many of them last as head coaches.

Well it's funny you say that, honz, because Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, and Jerry Sloan are examples of assistants who did last as head coaches. (BTW, Sloan is the only one who has been fired as a head coach. He was fired by the Bulls.)

If you are implying that it's better to go with an existing head coach (or former head coach) among the ones available, I'd say no thanks. Philadelphia can have Doug Collins. Avery Johnson, Jeff van Gundy, and the freshly fired Mike "I can't even coach a king" Brown have had their chances. It is unbelievable to me that Mark Jackson is even being considered for a head coaching job. (Rick Carlisle and Rick Adelman would have been worth considering, however, over the past couple of years.)

I'd generally go with an assistant over a college coach, too, because the success of college-to-NBA path is mixed. Popovich did coach at the college level, but he was an assistant--and GM--before becoming a head coach. Chuck Daly and Bill Fitch won titles, but that was 20+ years ago. Rick Pitino, John Calipari, Tim Floyd, P.J. Carlesimo, and Jerry Tarkanian all had underwhelming NBA head coach stints.

Thibodeau has years of experience, including assisting several NBA title teams. He has worked with foreigners. And he has been interviewing for years. There might be other options, but not many with his background. Utah's loyalty to Sloan is no less damaging than their loyalty to Kiri and Memo; the Jazz re-signed those guys without looking around. And Utah continues to fail to meet their potential. Utah was better than a 5th-seed team this year, and they were better than getting swept in the second round, even with the injuries.

 

[honz]

Yes, some work out wonderfully, but most don't. Are there some things I don't like about Sloan? Yes, but I doubt a different coach would make us any better.

 

[Revolution 9]

A lot of people are scared of change here. They think we'll suddenly become a horrible team or drop out of the playoffs without Sloan.
Of course there is a coach out there that would probably gel better with the players, and get more out of them. There's no
doubt it's risky trying to find that guy, because just getting rid of Sloan won't make us better. We would have to find the right guy.

Since Sloan is clearly at the very end of his time with us, I don't see why we are holding onto him any longer.
He's not going to get us over the top, and he's not the future of this team.
The longer we wait, the more time we waste on finding the right guy to lead Dwill, and be apart of the future.

This year would have been perfect for a coaching change.

 

[txjazzfan]

I have liked the idea of Thibodeau for a few years now. He has been a real difference maker in Boston. I don't really look at him as an inexperienced coach. Its almost as if he is a co-coach in Boston in charge of the Defense. He would be a great coach for us.

 

[Realjazz]

There is this guy I know from Russia that thinks we should fire Sloan.

 

[Lost_Jazz_Fan]

Um, no, you don't fire Sloan to hire Ty Corbin; you don't renew his contract so that you can hire a coach who actually enforces his own philosophy and develops players.

Sloan does neither. He has allowed Boozer and Okur to play poor defense for years (NOT saying that they should be DNP'd; they should be sat down for a possession or two until they get the message), he doesn't play players who have actually produced, he overplays some players, and he has a long string of poor relationships with especially "foreign" players not named Okur (Kirilenkogate (although it's been patched up now, it deteriorated far too far before), Giricek (was no reason to bury him like Sloan did), Arroyo (no need to escalate the way it did), and Amaechi (rumors of not just poor use of him but of outright discrimination)).

Thibodeau is a missed opportunity. He came from a relatively small-market NBA town. He worked under a head coach who was both a disciplinarian and a player's coach who was especially good with foreigners). The Jazz would've been a more attractive destination than the Hornets. All Miller had to do was not renew Sloan. The Jazz don't owe Sloan any job security whatsoever, and unless Sloan changes the way he handles players and in-game situations (which is unlikely beyond what he has already changed), I don't see Utah being able to get above the ceiling that they have been vacillating at for decades on end.

You have a lot more to gain. Such as a championship from a coach who can lead teams better. Being a hard-nosed tough guy only accomplishes part of that role.

I agree with some of your post but other parts are way off. You seem to have a blind hatred for Sloan and don't actually see the things he does year in and year out. He develops his players very well, maybe not to your liking but you can't blame a players laziness or ineptitude on Sloan (Fesenko and Koufos comes to mind). Sure he's stubborn at times but who out there right now is actually better? Who? The majority of players that have left Sloan's system have ended up being afterthoughts in the league and never reach the heights as a player that they did while playing under this system.

 

[Sean]

Remember when Marc Ivaronie was considered one of the best up and coming coaches? What's he doing now? I think he's now an assistant with the Raptors.

That's the problem here. The Jazz certainly might be missing out on an assistant who could step into the role and win right away. They could also find themselves in a situation where the assistant is no better and, frankly, worse than Sloan.

I get there is a group of fans here that believe Jerry Sloan is a bad coach. That the Jazz win in spite of his ability and that, most importantly, he is keeping Utah from that elusive NBA championship.

I disagree. I don't think Sloan is keeping Utah from anything. I don't believe, with this current roster, a new coach could step in and win more and do better than Sloan has the last four seasons.

I do believe, however, that there is a good possibility a coach could step in and force the franchise back a bit.

Look at Minnesota since they forced out Flip Saunders.

Or Detroit, for that matter.

How are the Kings doing since they fired Rick Adelman?

That's the unfortunate aspect of professional athletics. It's not like college ball where you can go out and get a proven winner. A coach who is looking for a step up, but has actually been a head coach and done something with that position. It's not the Utes with Urban Meyer or Rick Majerus.

You're not going to poach Doc Rivers from Boston or Scott Skiles from the Bucks. It ain't going to happen.

So you've got to rely on a retread or an unknown. Well those unknown coaches, regardless of how successful we perceive them, are still assistants to the head man. Is Boston's success due to Rivers or Thibodeau? Maybe neither. They do, after all, have a pretty damn good roster.

But is there enough evidence to toss Sloan aside for him? Of course not. He's not a proven get. He isn't a sure thing (and I know in sports, it's hard to find a sure thing).

If that's the case, then why risk it?

How many franchises have dumped a successful coach and actually gotten better without dramatic roster moves? And I mention that because even the best coaches struggle when they don't have the parts.

 

[calijazz]

Yes, some work out wonderfully, but most don't. Are there some things I don't like about Sloan? Yes, but I doubt a different coach would make us any better.

I agree. I don't agree with all of Sloan's decisions either. But, I'll take my chances with a coach that has won over 1,100 games over a hot prospect assistant coach who has won ZERO. Call me conservative, afraid of change, or whatever. I just think it's rational. Trading a proven for an unproven is irrational.

 

[InGameStrategy]

I agree with some of your post but other parts are way off. You seem to have a blind hatred for Sloan and don't actually see the things he does year in and year out. He develops his players very well, maybe not to your liking but you can't blame a players laziness or ineptitude on Sloan (Fesenko and Koufos comes to mind). Sure he's stubborn at times but who out there right now is actually better? Who? The majority of players that have left Sloan's system have ended up being afterthoughts in the league and never reach the heights as a player that they did while playing under this system.

I don't have a blind hatred for Sloan; there is nothing more that I would like (or would have liked) as a Jazz fan than to see better player development, better in-game management by the coaching staff, and (consequently) Jerry--along with his players--to get a ring. If had had a blind hatred for Sloan, I would dislike him no matter what he did and/or I would not want him to succeed, and I probably wouldn't give him any credit. The credit that I believe that he deserves is that he has mellowed out a bit and has opened the door a crack to new rotations and new strategies. The reduced technical fouls has limited the frivoulous lost points, and what seems to be an occasional experimentation with strategy has worked sometimes.

But I question his performance because I don't believe that the Jazz have met their potential, and that shortfall can be traced in part to coaching. Players can always do something more (train harder, play smarter, be better teammates, etc.), but coaches have significant control over the game--simply by deciding who is on the court and when, and how to use time outs, plays, and other tactics to optimize the team's success.

 

[calijazz]

I don't have a blind hatred for Sloan; there is nothing more that I would like (or would have liked) as a Jazz fan than to see better player development, better in-game management by the coaching staff, and (consequently) Jerry--along with his players--to get a ring. If had had a blind hatred for Sloan, I would dislike him no matter what he did and/or I would not want him to succeed, and I probably wouldn't give him any credit. The credit that I believe that he deserves is that he has mellowed out a bit and has opened the door a crack to new rotations and new strategies. The reduced technical fouls has limited the frivoulous lost points, and what seems to be an occasional experimentation with strategy has worked sometimes.

But I question his performance because I don't believe that the Jazz have met their potential, and that shortfall can be traced in part to coaching. Players can always do something more (train harder, play smarter, be better teammates, etc.), but coaches have significant control over the game--simply by deciding who is on the court and when, and how to use time outs, plays, and other tactics to optimize the team's success.

Please tell me how the Jazz haven't met their potential? Do you think the Jazz should be beating the Lakers, despite the Lakers significant size/talent advantage? There's a reason why they are in the Finals for the 3rd straight season...they have better personnel. Not because Sloan didn't get his team to play up to their potential.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Remember when Marc Ivaronie was considered one of the best up and coming coaches? What's he doing now? I think he's now an assistant with the Raptors.

That's the problem here. The Jazz certainly might be missing out on an assistant who could step into the role and win right away. They could also find themselves in a situation where the assistant is no better and, frankly, worse than Sloan.

I get there is a group of fans here that believe Jerry Sloan is a bad coach. That the Jazz win in spite of his ability and that, most importantly, he is keeping Utah from that elusive NBA championship.

I disagree. I don't think Sloan is keeping Utah from anything. I don't believe, with this current roster, a new coach could step in and win more and do better than Sloan has the last four seasons.

I respecfully disagree. With better coaching decisions, landing the 2nd or 3rd seed was plenty achievable with this roster, which means that Utah would've likely made it to the WCF (because Utah wouldn't have choked on San Antonio or Portland, even with the existing Sloan strategy).

This year, though, Sloan lost too many games by playing Millsap and Boozer and/or playing too much of Okur. And after three years of playing Boozer and Millsap against Gasol and Bynum/Odom, Sloan should've known that it wouldn't work this year either. If anything, he should've tried it it in the first game and then left it alone (i.e., <10 MPG, and preferably not at the end of games, which is too much of a height disadvantage). But that series might have been lost months ago when he put ZERO effort into finding minutes for the bigs. And yes, you're gonna lose a player's progress when you don't play them for several months on end--barely AT ALL, which is what happened to Koufos in his rookie year. (BTW, Koufos led the team in rebounding rate in this year's playoffs, so he was contributing, but Sloan preferred to give time to a thirtysomething Eurolurp and an undersized PF instead of to a legit 7-footer). A franchise focused on a title would've found time to develop a center, and a coach with any minimal sense of player evaluation would've known that Memo was too slow and too weak to handle the Fakers--and maybe the Nuggets. It is possible that Utah would have not beaten the Nuggets if Memo had been healthy because Sloan would've been too tempted to play Okur, even though MO's matchup vs. the Nugs is not good.

It's probably a stretch to say that Utah had the potential to win a title, although doing so wasn't out of the question. But they did have talent to go further than they did. Some teams would love to have the track record that Utah has, but again, I wouldn't have a problem with Utah's success if they had maximized their potential, even if they hadn't made the playoffs at all.

If you want an example of a coaching change that worked, look no further than Phoenix. Alvin Gentry stressed playing on both ends of the floor, and Stoudemire tried to play D for the first time in his career. Oh, and he actually gave his young center some PT.

 

[KhaOZ]

What do you suppose the Jazz do? Fire Sloan so they can hire his assistant? Ludicrous. If you have a proven coach, just stick with him (which we clearly do). You have a whole lot more to lose than to gain.

This